546 réponses à ce sujet

[DPSSOC]

LobselVith8 wrote...
It's an example of Ian pointing out that the Dalish clan isn't a dictatorship, where everyone capitulates to the rule of one single person (which seems to be the case for many human societies where Kings and Queens rule over the people).

 
Except it doesn't establish that at all.  Even dictators have advisors.  A dictator may delegate running the military to his generals, but he's still the one in charge, if he makes a decision it overrides that of the generals.  We see know evidence of a Keeper's decision being overridden by anybody, but we do have two examples of a Keeper overriding others.

LobselVith8 wrote...
The backstory of the Dalish Warden is another example of the elders refusing to sanction a relationship between the Keeper and a hunter, despite the former's station in the clan.

You're conflating didn't with couldn't.  The Dalish Warden's parents could have said, "To hell with you we're getting married." but they didn't, because the Dalish need to maintain smooth relations within and between clans, if they start squabbling amongst themselves the humans will take advantage.  Even if they couldn't you're mixing social rule with political.  The elders can say two elves can't get married because of reasons, but again we never see evidence that they can over rule a Keeper's decision with regards to moving the clan or staying put for example.

LobselVith8 wrote...
Having the authority to say "no" to the Keeper disproves the idea that Keepers are little more than dictators of the clan; in other words, it's not a magocracy like the Tevinter Imperium. In fact, Merrill's refusal to abide by Marethari's (baseless) opinion of the Eluvian, and her decision to leave the clan (which was also done by Velanna, Feynriel's mother Arianni, and Zevran's mother), shows that the elves can freely leave the clan, and go on their own path.

That doesn't mean they're not dictators, it means they aren't brutal, that they're by and large benevolent, but they aren't brutal.  You can disagree with a Keeper but as your examples show you either live with their decisions regardless or leave.  If you disagree with the Keeper and your only options are to leave or, if you can gain enough support, kill them that's a dictatorship.  If there's no one else you can appeal to to reverse a Keeper's decision they are an absolute authourity.

IanPolaris wrote...

MisterJB wrote...
Because the possibility of a coup d'etat somehow makes an autocracy not an autocracy? That's preposterous.

Nothing intrinsically wrong with a mage having a political power but lots of things intrinsically wrong with a system where ONLY mages are considered qualified to have politic power.

An Impeachment is not a coup d'etat. Keepers can very clearly be impeached, and the game verifies this.

-Polaris

I don't think it's an impeachment if it requires murder. I believe the word for that is regicide.

I'll ask again if the only way for the entire clan to get a Keeper's decision reversed is to convince them to reverse it or violently remove them from their position how do they not have absolute authourity?  If a Keeper can just declare, "We're leaving now," and all a Halla Herder can say is, "We really shouldn't." the Keeper is the one who decides when they leave.  If the Hahren, Chief Crafter, Chief Hunter, and Halla Herder can demand the clan move on and the Keeper can just say, "No." the Keeper has absolute authourity.

[dragonflight288]

IanPolaris wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
An Impeachment is not a coup d'etat.  Keepers can very clearly be impeached, and the game verifies this.
-Polaris

Killing the Keeper because you are unhappy with the way he or she is ruling is a coup d'etat. Let's forego removal from office and go straight to ritualistic murder.
In fact, being unable to remove the leader from his office other than through force of arms is a characteristic of an autocracy.

No it's not.  A coup d'etat refers to a military takeover of questionable legality (and the former leader isn't always killed).  Killing the keeper (or removing them) by the decision of the clan (and hunting and killing the keeper if necessary) is impeachment.

You are mistaken and frankly confused about this.

-Polaris

The Dalish are not a magocracy, and the Keepers aren't infallible.

One thing that stank about DA2 was that everything in that city seemed to be an exception to the rule. Dalish usually have halla and don't stay in the same place for seven years. Nor do they live in an area that keeps their keeper (and other mages in the clan, as we know that there is some minor competition for the position of first. Lanaya confirms this in Dragon Age Origins.) They aren't usually attacked by Varterral, nor do they live in areas where the veil is extremely thin. Nor are they the type to do nothing when templars torture and kill their hunters.

The templars are too extreme, the mages are too insane, and everything about the City of Chains is one extreme or another. The Dalish never once practiced a magocracy. More accurately, they display extreme self-righteousness and stupidity.

EDIT: So yeah, I agree with IanPolaris on this one. Wherever mages are free does not mean the rise of a second Imperium.

Modifié par dragonflight288, 02 février 2013 - 02:42 .

[DPSSOC]

dragonflight288 wrote...
EDIT: So yeah, I agree with IanPolaris on this one. Wherever mages are free does not mean the rise of a second Imperium.

This is not about mages, this is not about Tevinter, this is about the Dalish, their politics, and the fact you people keep insisting the Keeper doesn't have absolute authourity when we continually see them make decisions outside their jurisdiction (Keeping the lore) and you can't bring up an actual example of some other elder saying, "No Keeper that's stupid, we're doing this."  Hell you can't even come up with an example of multiple elders saying that because when multiple elders did their only option was to LEAVE.

Just one, that's all we need, just one example of a Crafter, Halla Herder, Hahren, or Hunter telling a Keeper where they can stuff it.

If the Keepers weren't mages it would still be a bad system of government, but it'd be a bad system of government with a larger portion of the population that could qualify, not just people born with magic, and slanted towards those descended from the nobility of a nation that !@#$ing failed.

Dammit why can't I just forget DA2 I used to like the Dalish.

[BlueMagitek]

IanPolaris wrote...

No it's not.  A coup d'etat refers to a military takeover of questionable legality (and the former leader isn't always killed).  Killing the keeper (or removing them) by the decision of the clan (and hunting and killing the keeper if necessary) is impeachment.

You are mistaken and frankly confused about this.

-Polaris

In most cases of impeachment the accused isn't murdered.  And there's usually some sort of trial involved, and not because they just disagree with the decision of the accused.  It's really more like treason and murder to replace a Keeper than impeachment. :/

[IanPolaris]

DPSSOC wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
EDIT: So yeah, I agree with IanPolaris on this one. Wherever mages are free does not mean the rise of a second Imperium.

This is not about mages, this is not about Tevinter, this is about the Dalish, their politics, and the fact you people keep insisting the Keeper doesn't have absolute authourity when we continually see them make decisions outside their jurisdiction (Keeping the lore) and you can't bring up an actual example of some other elder saying, "No Keeper that's stupid, we're doing this."  Hell you can't even come up with an example of multiple elders saying that because when multiple elders did their only option was to LEAVE.

Just one, that's all we need, just one example of a Crafter, Halla Herder, Hahren, or Hunter telling a Keeper where they can stuff it.

If the Keepers weren't mages it would still be a bad system of government, but it'd be a bad system of government with a larger portion of the population that could qualify, not just people born with magic, and slanted towards those descended from the nobility of a nation that !@#$ing failed.

Dammit why can't I just forget DA2 I used to like the Dalish.

If you like the Dalish before DA2 then you still should.  There was NOTHING about Merethari's clan in DA2 that even approached how normal Dalish clans operate.  Point in fact the Dalish form of govt clearly works and is quite good....for the Dalish.  In fact it's not much different than most other sorts of tribal govts around the globe.  Essentially you have a group of elders and a "first among equal" that everyone looks to for leadership.  You can call it "cheiftan" or "keeper" but the role is essentially the same.  A Chief in a tribal society is NOT a dictator and can't rule a tribe by fiat...at least not for long, and the Dalish seem to be the same way.  The inabilty to rule by fiat means the keeper (like other tribal cheifs) is NOT a dictator.

As for it being slanted towards a nobility of a nation that failed, it actually brought the Empire of Orlais to it's knees and only fell after a brutal campaign against ALL the other nations of Thedas....and in fact all Dalish Clans are said to represent the old aristocratic lines of the Dales, not just the Keepers.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

BlueMagitek wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

No it's not.  A coup d'etat refers to a military takeover of questionable legality (and the former leader isn't always killed).  Killing the keeper (or removing them) by the decision of the clan (and hunting and killing the keeper if necessary) is impeachment.

You are mistaken and frankly confused about this.

-Polaris

In most cases of impeachment the accused isn't murdered.  And there's usually some sort of trial involved, and not because they just disagree with the decision of the accused.  It's really more like treason and murder to replace a Keeper than impeachment. :/

In the case of the Dalish the Keeper isn't murdered either.  The possessed keeper is hunted down and executed....lawfully.  That means it's not murder.

-Polaris

[MisterJB]

IanPolaris wrote...
No it's not.  A coup d'etat refers to a military takeover of questionable legality (and the former leader isn't always killed).  Killing the keeper (or removing them) by the decision of the clan (and hunting and killing the keeper if necessary) is impeachment.

You are mistaken and frankly confused about this.

-Polaris

I'm stupefied. Really.
Basically, what you are suggesting is that if the clan finds reason enough, they can just butcher their Keeper and that this is a perfectly legal impechment. You know, forget removal from office (because there is no mention whatsoever of Keepers stepping down, they serve for life), we'll just kill them instead. That's...logical?
If we follow this logic, the French Revolution of the 18th century was an impechment. The people decided the king wasn't doing a good job leading the country and executed him.

Merril mentions that if the Keeper is possessed, the clan will hunt and kill him. But that is not impeachment! Period!
Impeachment means to accuse an official of unlawful activity. Becoming possessed means that the Keeper is unable to continue performing his functions and he is being removed from office but that is not impechment.
There is a bleeding difference!

[BlueMagitek]

IanPolaris wrote...

In the case of the Dalish the Keeper isn't murdered either.  The possessed keeper is hunted down and executed....lawfully.  That means it's not murder.

-Polaris

A possessed Keeper, yes.  An abomination.  We're talking about a Keeper who is making decisions that the rest of the clan doesn't agree with. 

There's kind of a huge difference there.

And now you're making huge generalizations about tribal societies.  Some tribes operated by way as you said, others gave more power to their chief.  You're also ignoring the overlap between Chief and Shaman that the Keeper possesses.  He's essentially both the spiritual and material leader of the Dalish, which tend to lean towards the latter.

[IanPolaris]

BlueMagitek wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

In the case of the Dalish the Keeper isn't murdered either.  The possessed keeper is hunted down and executed....lawfully.  That means it's not murder.

-Polaris

A possessed Keeper, yes.  An abomination.  We're talking about a Keeper who is making decisions that the rest of the clan doesn't agree with. 

There's kind of a huge difference there.

And now you're making huge generalizations about tribal societies.  Some tribes operated by way as you said, others gave more power to their chief.  You're also ignoring the overlap between Chief and Shaman that the Keeper possesses.  He's essentially both the spiritual and material leader of the Dalish, which tend to lean towards the latter.

The Dalish clearly operate the way I said, and the keeper isn't the spiritual leader.  The Hahren is and he (or she) may or may not be a mage. 

The point is that the keeper isn't the sole authority.  I also point out that possession isn't always something that's overtly visible (and in the case of pride demons in particular often isn't).  However, the clan clearly has the right to determine if the keeper is possessed and act on it.  It is not an unreasonable generalization to conclude that if the clan as a whole has this right, they have the right to depose/impeach keepers for other reasons as well.  In fact the fact that Mehariel's father (who was a keeper) couldn't blithly ignore the wishes of other elders for the woman he loved tells us that in fact the Keeper must respect the wishes of other elders.

-Polaris

[dragonflight288]

MisterJB wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
No it's not.  A coup d'etat refers to a military takeover of questionable legality (and the former leader isn't always killed).  Killing the keeper (or removing them) by the decision of the clan (and hunting and killing the keeper if necessary) is impeachment.

You are mistaken and frankly confused about this.

-Polaris

I'm stupefied. Really.
Basically, what you are suggesting is that if the clan finds reason enough, they can just butcher their Keeper and that this is a perfectly legal impechment. You know, forget removal from office (because there is no mention whatsoever of Keepers stepping down, they serve for life), we'll just kill them instead. That's...logical?
If we follow this logic, the French Revolution of the 18th century was an impechment. The people decided the king wasn't doing a good job leading the country and executed him.

Merril mentions that if the Keeper is possessed, the clan will hunt and kill him. But that is not impeachment! Period!
Impeachment means to accuse an official of unlawful activity. Becoming possessed means that the Keeper is unable to continue performing his functions and he is being removed from office but that is not impechment.
There is a bleeding difference!

You know...karma will dictate that we'll see a Keeper get lawfully impeached and exiled like Velanna did (and she was the First for her clan) rather than willingly leaving as the case with Merrill was, in Dragon Age Inquisition. And if canon lore proves us wrong, then we'll be eating our words.

Right now, it's pure speculation, but I personally give more weight to the arguments that Keeper's aren't all powerful lords of their clans. Merely advisors and keepers of the ancient lore, who choose when they leave.

[BlueMagitek]

IanPolaris wrote...

The Dalish clearly operate the way I said, and the keeper isn't the spiritual leader.  The Hahren is and he (or she) may or may not be a mage. 

The point is that the keeper isn't the sole authority.  I also point out that possession isn't always something that's overtly visible (and in the case of pride demons in particular often isn't).  However, the clan clearly has the right to determine if the keeper is possessed and act on it.  It is not an unreasonable generalization to conclude that if the clan as a whole has this right, they have the right to depose/impeach keepers for other reasons as well.  In fact the fact that Mehariel's father (who was a keeper) couldn't blithly ignore the wishes of other elders for the woman he loved tells us that in fact the Keeper must respect the wishes of other elders.

-Polaris

Yes, clearly, which is why so many people don't really buy into it.  The Keeper holds their past and their future.  A Hahren is just an Elder, and while the Elder is a leader for *city* elves, the Dalish toe in line with the Keeper, or they run away / leave.

But the Keeper is the top authority.  And we aren't talking about a Keeper becoming an abomination.  We are talking about removing a leader for reasons other than demonic infestation.  The only system they seem to have in place for it is treason and murder, which are not really a formalized method of handling anything and wouldn't fall under the definition.  As for Dalish Warden's father, he was Keeper, but in a different clan.  He had no dominion over the woman he wanted and if her Keeper disagreed then it was a no go, hence the need to run away.  Just as the King of Ferelden does not have dominion over a citizen of Tevinter.  So we'll go ahead and say that a Keeper respects the wishes of another Keeper regarding their own people or he loses (read: abandons) his job.

Edit:

You seem to be under the impression that I believe the Keeper to be a complete autocrat who blood magics people into doing his bidding if they refuse.  That is incorrect.  I believe the Keeper to be head of the clan, and while various other Elders inside the Keeper's own clan may have important roles, they ultimately submit to the Keeper, leave, or try and murder said Keeper.  And even if that isn't true (say, all of the other Elders disagreeing can let them veto the Keeper), the Keeper still has enormous influence, as Marethri resulted in Merrill's ostracization of the clan (but the promise of her being welcomed in open arms remained on the table).

That we have seen no impeachment process for a Keeper doesn't preclude there being one, but that it wasn't used in the case of Dalish Warden's clan over seven years when another person would have moved the clan by then, is very strange.  And I'm sure Merrill would have mentioned had anyone tried it.

Modifié par BlueMagitek, 02 février 2013 - 04:56 .

[MisterJB]

dragonflight288 wrote...
You know...karma will dictate that we'll see a Keeper get lawfully impeached and exiled like Velanna did (and she was the First for her clan) rather than willingly leaving as the case with Merrill was, in Dragon Age Inquisition. And if canon lore proves us wrong, then we'll be eating our words.

Vellana's was a self imposed exile. Her Keeper said that if she wished to fight the humans, she would do so alone. And Vellana did just that
I don't believe in Karma.

[IanPolaris]

BlueMagitek wrote...

That we have seen no impeachment process for a Keeper doesn't preclude there being one, but that it wasn't used in the case of Dalish Warden's clan over seven years when another person would have moved the clan by then, is very strange.  And I'm sure Merrill would have mentioned had anyone tried it.

Master Ilen was openly talking about moving his students whether the keeper moved or not.  When the chief crafter starts saying that, impeachment was surely close behind...but Merethari was an exceptionally old and respected keeper.  The clan didn't want to believe anything bad about her.

I also note that NOTHING about the DA2 Sundermount clan should be taken as an example of how Dalish usually work.  They were trapped near a city without their halla where the veil was thin and the keeper (and quite likely other members of the clan) were under the influence of a powerful demon and who knows what other spirits.  The fact that the Vaterel no longer recognized that Dalish clan as Dalish should be a dead giveaway.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

MisterJB wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
You know...karma will dictate that we'll see a Keeper get lawfully impeached and exiled like Velanna did (and she was the First for her clan) rather than willingly leaving as the case with Merrill was, in Dragon Age Inquisition. And if canon lore proves us wrong, then we'll be eating our words.

Vellana's was a self imposed exile. Her Keeper said that if she wished to fight the humans, she would do so alone. And Vellana did just that
I don't believe in Karma.

Velanna's exile was self-imposed.  She was impeached from being first.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

BlueMagitek wrote...

You seem to be under the impression that I believe the Keeper to be a complete autocrat who blood magics people into doing his bidding if they refuse.  That is incorrect.  I believe the Keeper to be head of the clan, and while various other Elders inside the Keeper's own clan may have important roles, they ultimately submit to the Keeper, leave, or try and murder said Keeper.  And even if that isn't true (say, all of the other Elders disagreeing can let them veto the Keeper), the Keeper still has enormous influence, as Marethri resulted in Merrill's ostracization of the clan (but the promise of her being welcomed in open arms remained on the table).

Talk to MisterJB who clearly seems to have this impression.

-Polaris

[MisterJB]

IanPolaris wrote...
Velanna's exile was self-imposed.  She was impeached from being first.

-Polaris

Modifié par MisterJB, 02 février 2013 - 07:10 .

[MisterJB]

IanPolaris wrote...
The clan didn't want to believe anything bad about her.

You can relate, I'm sure.

 

The fact that the Vaterel no longer recognized that Dalish clan as Dalish should be a dead giveaway.

Right, the Varterral in Witch Hunt must have not also recognized Ariane as a dalish because...pffrrrt.

Modifié par MisterJB, 02 février 2013 - 07:10 .

[IanPolaris]

MisterJB wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
Velanna's exile was self-imposed.  She was impeached from being first.

-Polaris

I know exactly what it means.  Do you?  Velanna was fired from being the first for her radical anti-human views that endangered the clan.  Her exile was self-imposed but her clan did not want her back even if Velanna wanted to return.  Merrill was (officially anyway) still part of her clan and welcome back. 

That's the difference.....just because you post cute photos doesn't make what you say accurate.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

MisterJB wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
The clan didn't want to believe anything bad about her.

You can relate, I'm sure.

Is there info content here, or are you trying to insult with snark?

 

The fact that the Vaterel no longer recognized that Dalish clan as Dalish should be a dead giveaway.

Right, the Varterral in Witch Hunt must have not also recognized Ariane as a dalish because...pffrrrt.

We know from the in-game lore that Varterral leave Dalish alone.  Arriane's case was also exceptional being in the middle of the Dragon Waste and with one of the most powerful malificars in Thedas not more than a 100 yards away.

Merrill explains how the Varterral normally work and she has no reason to lie about this point.

-Polaris

[MisterJB]

IanPolaris wrote...
I know exactly what it means.  Do you?  Velanna was fired from being the first for her radical anti-human views that endangered the clan.  Her exile was self-imposed but her clan did not want her back even if Velanna wanted to return.  Merrill was (officially anyway) still part of her clan and welcome back. 

That's the difference.....just because you post cute photos doesn't make what you say accurate.

-Polaris

Clearly, you don't considering that you've already called a regicide "impechment".
Vellana was not impeached at all, no one accused her commiting any crime or placed her on trial, she was not fired. She argued for a course of direction for the clan that the Keeper disagreed and quit her job because of it.
Disdain from the rest of the clan does not equal "impeachment".

IanPolaris wrote...
Is there info content here, or are you trying to insult with snark?

Because you're the soul of politeness
You don't want to believe in anything bad about the Dalish.

We
know from the in-game lore that Varterral leave Dalish alone. 
Arriane's case was also exceptional being in the middle of the Dragon
Waste and with one of the most powerful malificars in Thedas not more
than a 100 yards away.

Merrill explains how the Varterral normally work and she has no reason to lie about this point.

All we know is that the Varterral normally leave the Dalish alone which could be for any number of reasons such as clans being usually in too great a number for an animal to attack.
The presence of a mate or a foal could have easily driven this one to be more agressive, there were two
varterrals in Sundermount, after all. And no, I don't believe when she says that varterrals can ressurect out of duty alone. That is a legend with nothing to back it up.

Since when did Maleficars cause strange reactions in animals?
The Marabi is quite fond of Morrigan and she used to shapeshift into an animal and play with others.

Modifié par MisterJB, 02 février 2013 - 07:33 .

[IanPolaris]

MisterJB wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
I know exactly what it means.  Do you?  Velanna was fired from being the first for her radical anti-human views that endangered the clan.  Her exile was self-imposed but her clan did not want her back even if Velanna wanted to return.  Merrill was (officially anyway) still part of her clan and welcome back. 

That's the difference.....just because you post cute photos doesn't make what you say accurate.

-Polaris

Clearly, you don't considering that you've already called a regicide "impechment".
Vellana was not impeached at all, no one accused her commiting any crime or placed her on trial, she was not fired. She argued for a course of direction for the clan that the Keeper disagreed and quit her job because of it.
Disdain from the rest of the clan does not equal "impeachment".

She was KICKED OUT of her clan and it was punishment for her anti-human activities that endangered the clan.  That IS impeachment.  Also killing a keeper that has been found to be possessed is impeachment.   Again the crime is endangering the clan.

IanPolaris wrote...
Is there info content here, or are you trying to insult with snark?

Because you're the soul of politeness
You don't want to believe in anything bad about the Dalish.

Once again you are wrong twice over.  You are wrong in the first place in that veiled personal insults are still personal insults.  That's all I'll say on the matter.

You are wrong second place by assuming that I assume the Dalish can do no wrong.  In fact if you've bothered to read any of my posting history, you'll find that I actually have fairly little sympathy for the Dalish, and I think the Dalish as a culture are not only misguided but in fact doomed.

We
know from the in-game lore that Varterral leave Dalish alone. 
Arriane's case was also exceptional being in the middle of the Dragon
Waste and with one of the most powerful malificars in Thedas not more
than a 100 yards away.

Merrill explains how the Varterral normally work and she has no reason to lie about this point.

All we know is that the Varterral normally leave the Dalish alone which could be for any number of reasons such as clans being usually in too great a number for an animal to attack.
The presence of a mate or a foal could have easily driven this one to be more agressive, there were two
varterrals in Sundermount, after all. And no, I don't believe when she says that varterrals can ressurect out of duty alone. That is a legend with nothing to back it up.

We have no reason not to believe Merrill on this point.  In fact she is speaking with the authority of someone with keeper training.  That makes what she says on these points to be game lore.

Since when did Maleficars cause strange reactions in animals?
The Marabi is quite fond of Morrigan and she used to shapeshift into an animal and play with others.

We have no idea what sort of forces or influences Morrigan can can or are generally present in that very unique place in the Dragon Waste.  I would take anything that happens there with a large grain of salt.

-Polaris

[MisterJB]

IanPolaris wrote...
She was KICKED OUT of her clan and it was punishment for her anti-human activities that endangered the clan.  That IS impeachment.  Also killing a keeper that has been found to be possessed is impeachment.   Again the crime is endangering the clan.

First of all, Vellana wasn't kicked out. She chose to leave just as easily as she could have chosen to stay. She makes it extremely clear that she was the one who walked away and that her Keeper wanted her to stay. That is not impeachment, that's quitting your job.
Second, impeachment means to legally accuse an official of unlawful activity and have him be punished thus. Being possessed is NOT an unlawful activity, it's not an activity at all. It's the modern world equivalent of being too ill to lead and being replaced due to it, which is NOT impeachment.

Impeachment would be if Marethari had been removed from her position for endagering the clan by staying seven years in the same spot which she wasn't because, apparently, the Dalish can't reprimand their keeper whose will is absolute.

Once again you are wrong twice over.  You are wrong in the first place in that veiled personal insults are still personal insults.  That's all I'll say on the matter.

You have insulted me, somethimes without even bothering to using a veil.

You are wrong second place by assuming that I assume the Dalish can do no wrong.  In fact if you've bothered to read any of my posting history, you'll find that I actually have fairly little sympathy for the Dalish, and I think the Dalish as a culture are not only misguided but in fact doomed.

Also, autocratic magocracy.

We have no reason not to believe Merrill on this point.  In fact she is speaking with the authority of someone with keeper training.  That makes what she says on these points to be game lore.

The reasons I have for disbelieving Merril when she tells me the varterrals were created by elves and can ressurect are the same reasons that lead me to disbelieve a Mother of the Chantry if she tells me the Maker spoke to Andraste. Because it's a legend without evidence to back it up.

We have no idea what sort of forces or influences Morrigan can can or are generally present in that very unique place in the Dragon Waste.  I would take anything that happens there with a large grain of salt.

Basically, we have no evidence whatsoever of maleficars or dragons having any sort of effect on animals but we should consider the possibility because it suits your view of what varterrals are.
We actually have evidence of Morrigan getting along well with animals, in fact.

Modifié par MisterJB, 02 février 2013 - 08:08 .

[BlueMagitek]

IanPolaris wrote...

Master Ilen was openly talking about moving his students whether the keeper moved or not.  When the chief crafter starts saying that, impeachment was surely close behind...but Merethari was an exceptionally old and respected keeper.  The clan didn't want to believe anything bad about her.

I also note that NOTHING about the DA2 Sundermount clan should be taken as an example of how Dalish usually work.  They were trapped near a city without their halla where the veil was thin and the keeper (and quite likely other members of the clan) were under the influence of a powerful demon and who knows what other spirits.  The fact that the Vaterel no longer recognized that Dalish clan as Dalish should be a dead giveaway.

-Polaris

You say "surely", but we never really see it brought up.  Instead, they're just leaving, which is one of the options (deal with it, leave, murder Keeper) that don't seem to involve impeachment. 

Or, perhaps, the Vatterel had orders to guard something regardless of who it was.  Using an ancient creature's judgment on something, especially when it is related to Arlathan, isn't the greatest judge of a thing.  Or perhaps the Dragon was Andraste Reborn. :/

[IanPolaris]

BlueMagitek wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Master Ilen was openly talking about moving his students whether the keeper moved or not.  When the chief crafter starts saying that, impeachment was surely close behind...but Merethari was an exceptionally old and respected keeper.  The clan didn't want to believe anything bad about her.

I also note that NOTHING about the DA2 Sundermount clan should be taken as an example of how Dalish usually work.  They were trapped near a city without their halla where the veil was thin and the keeper (and quite likely other members of the clan) were under the influence of a powerful demon and who knows what other spirits.  The fact that the Vaterel no longer recognized that Dalish clan as Dalish should be a dead giveaway.

-Polaris

You say "surely", but we never really see it brought up.  Instead, they're just leaving, which is one of the options (deal with it, leave, murder Keeper) that don't seem to involve impeachment. 

You assume impeachment involves a fancy trial.  It can, but it needn't.  It was clear that the clan was starting to wonder about Merethari's wisdom in staying.  The point is that the Templar supporters are trying to paint (or seem to) as some sort of Magister-lite dictatorship that is dominated by magic and that isn't the case.  In fact keeper's almost never use magic (and almost never publically) and being mages is the least important part of being a keeper.  The magic is important only because it reflects a heritage that all elvhan once had.

Or, perhaps, the Vatterel had orders to guard something regardless of who it was.  Using an ancient creature's judgment on something, especially when it is related to Arlathan, isn't the greatest judge of a thing.  Or perhaps the Dragon was Andraste Reborn. :/

In the case of DA2 almost certainly not unless you actually believe that Merethari actually ordered her hunters in to deliberately die.  It's not just an ancient creature, it's an avatar of the old gods (at least that's the theory).

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

[quote]MisterJB wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
She was KICKED OUT of her clan and it was punishment for her anti-human activities that endangered the clan.  That IS impeachment.  Also killing a keeper that has been found to be possessed is impeachment.   Again the crime is endangering the clan.[/quote]
First of all, Vellana wasn't kicked out. She chose to leave just as easily as she could have chosen to stay. She makes it extremely clear that she was the one who walked away and that her Keeper wanted her to stay. That is not impeachment, that's quitting your job.
[/quote]

Velanna was no longer part of her clan.  Merrill was.  Big difference.  That means that Velanna's exile is not entirely self-imposed but also the result of the judgement of the clan.

[quote]
Second, impeachment means to legally accuse an official of unlawful activity and have him be punished thus. Being possessed is NOT an unlawful activity, it's not an activity at all. It's the modern world equivalent of being too ill to lead and being replaced due to it, which is NOT impeachment.
[/quote]

Actually you do choose to be possessed (and Merethari certainly did) except for very extreme circumstances (which don't apply here).  So that certainly qualifies even by your definition.

[quote]
Impeachment would be if Marethari had been removed from her position for endagering the clan by staying seven years in the same spot which she wasn't because, apparently, the Dalish can't reprimand their keeper whose will is absolute.
[/quote]

Sure they can.  In fact you hear plenty of criticism of Meretheri by Act III, and you also here critical things about Zathrien in DAO.  They just haven't reached critical mass.  In fact Mahariel's father was a keeper and he most certainly could (and was) sanctioned by the other elders.

[quote]
[quote]
Once again you are wrong twice over.  You are wrong in the first place in that veiled personal insults are still personal insults.  That's all I'll say on the matter.[/quote]
You have insulted me, somethimes without even bothering to using a veil.
[/quote]

Personal insult.  There is a difference between criticising one's logic and position, and insulting the person.  There is a definate line there.

[quote]

[quote]You are wrong second place by assuming that I assume the Dalish can do no wrong.  In fact if you've bothered to read any of my posting history, you'll find that I actually have fairly little sympathy for the Dalish, and I think the Dalish as a culture are not only misguided but in fact doomed.[/quote]
Also, autocratic magocracy.
[/quote]

The Dalish are clearly not autocratic, and the keepers are lead because they know the ancient lore.  Just being a mage does NOT grant you status or leadership position, so it's not a magocracy.


[quote]
[quote]
We have no reason not to believe Merrill on this point.  In fact she is speaking with the authority of someone with keeper training.  That makes what she says on these points to be game lore.[/quote]
The reasons I have for disbelieving Merril when she tells me the varterrals were created by elves and can ressurect are the same reasons that lead me to disbelieve a Mother of the Chantry if she tells me the Maker spoke to Andraste. Because it's a legend without evidence to back it up.
[/quote]

When she says that the Vaterral don't normally attack Dalish, she has no reason not to be completely truthful.  This is a here and now observation not a dispute about comparitive history or mythology.  At most she might be mistaken, but there is no reason to think she is.

[quote]
[quote]
We have no idea what sort of forces or influences Morrigan can can or are generally present in that very unique place in the Dragon Waste.  I would take anything that happens there with a large grain of salt.
[/quote]
Basically, we have no evidence whatsoever of maleficars or dragons having any sort of effect on animals but we should consider the possibility because it suits your view of what varterrals are.
We actually have evidence of Morrigan getting along well with animals, in fact.

[/quote]

What I am saying is that there are enough exeptional aspects of that scene that the lore we can glean from it is limited at best.

-Polaris